CVE-2024-53128 : Detail

CVE-2024-53128

5.5
/
Medium
0.04%V3
Local
2024-12-04
14h20 +00:00
2025-01-17
13h27 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

sched/task_stack: fix object_is_on_stack() for KASAN tagged pointers

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/task_stack: fix object_is_on_stack() for KASAN tagged pointers When CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS and CONFIG_KASAN_STACK are enabled, the object_is_on_stack() function may produce incorrect results due to the presence of tags in the obj pointer, while the stack pointer does not have tags. This discrepancy can lead to incorrect stack object detection and subsequently trigger warnings if CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS is also enabled. Example of the warning: ODEBUG: object 3eff800082ea7bb0 is NOT on stack ffff800082ea0000, but annotated. ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at lib/debugobjects.c:557 __debug_object_init+0x330/0x364 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc5 #4 Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) pstate: 600000c5 (nZCv daIF -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : __debug_object_init+0x330/0x364 lr : __debug_object_init+0x330/0x364 sp : ffff800082ea7b40 x29: ffff800082ea7b40 x28: 98ff0000c0164518 x27: 98ff0000c0164534 x26: ffff800082d93ec8 x25: 0000000000000001 x24: 1cff0000c00172a0 x23: 0000000000000000 x22: ffff800082d93ed0 x21: ffff800081a24418 x20: 3eff800082ea7bb0 x19: efff800000000000 x18: 0000000000000000 x17: 00000000000000ff x16: 0000000000000047 x15: 206b63617473206e x14: 0000000000000018 x13: ffff800082ea7780 x12: 0ffff800082ea78e x11: 0ffff800082ea790 x10: 0ffff800082ea79d x9 : 34d77febe173e800 x8 : 34d77febe173e800 x7 : 0000000000000001 x6 : 0000000000000001 x5 : feff800082ea74b8 x4 : ffff800082870a90 x3 : ffff80008018d3c4 x2 : 0000000000000001 x1 : ffff800082858810 x0 : 0000000000000050 Call trace: __debug_object_init+0x330/0x364 debug_object_init_on_stack+0x30/0x3c schedule_hrtimeout_range_clock+0xac/0x26c schedule_hrtimeout+0x1c/0x30 wait_task_inactive+0x1d4/0x25c kthread_bind_mask+0x28/0x98 init_rescuer+0x1e8/0x280 workqueue_init+0x1a0/0x3cc kernel_init_freeable+0x118/0x200 kernel_init+0x28/0x1f0 ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- ODEBUG: object 3eff800082ea7bb0 is NOT on stack ffff800082ea0000, but annotated. ------------[ cut here ]------------

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE Other No informations.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

 [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version To (excluding) 6.11.10

References